High Court Kerala High Court

B.Sridhar vs P.S.Umesh on 8 September, 2010

Kerala High Court
B.Sridhar vs P.S.Umesh on 8 September, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 1885 of 2010()


1. B.SRIDHAR, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. P.S.UMESH, S/O.SHANMUGHAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :08/09/2010

 O R D E R
            M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
          ===========================
            CRL.M.C.No.1885 & 1886
                      OF 2010
          ===========================

   Dated this the 8th day of September,2010

                     ORDER

Petitioner is the fifth accused in

S.T.3685/2008 and S.T. 3686/2008 on the file of

Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-III,

Thrissur taken cognizance for the offence under

section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act on

Annexure A complaint. The case of the

respective first respondent complainant before

the learned Magistrate was that petitioner

committed the offence as he was one of the

Directors of the first accused Company. The

dishonoured cheque involved in S.T.3685/2008

was issued on 23.6.2007. The dishonoured

cheque in S.T.3686/2008 was issued on

30.4.2007. These petitions are filed under

section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

Crl.M.C.1885 & 1886 of 2010 2

to quash the proceedings against him contending

that petitioner was not the Director of the Company

when the cheques were issued.

2. Though notice was served on the first

respondent, in both the petitions they did not

appear.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner was heard.

4.Annexure E order of this court in

Crl.M.C.2751/2008 and connected cases establishes

that petitioner resigned from the Company with

effect from 28.6.2006 and the matter was reported

to the Registrar of Companies also. It was also

found that petitioner was not responsible for the

Company subsequent to 28.6.2006. Hence on the

dates when the dishonoured cheque involved in these

cases were issued petitioner has nothing to do

with the first accused Company. Hence he cannot be

prosecuted for the offence. Therefore continuation

of the proceedings as against the petitioner is

only an abuse of process of the court.

Crl.M.C.1885 & 1886 of 2010     3

      Petitions         are  allowed.   S.T.3685/2008   &

S.T.3686/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class

Magistrate’s Court-III, Thrissur as against the

petitioner the fifth accused is quashed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
tpl/-

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

———————

W.P.(C).NO. /06

———————

JUDGMENT

SEPTEMBER,2006